gzam1312

Truth is, most people want RPG elements in open world games and a sense of exploration, both of which GTA 4 scaled down considerably from SA.

Also, after having 3 cities, Mt Chilliad, countryside and jets in SA going back to the most unappealing city in the USA was gonna be a problem....but obviously GTA 4 was still better than most games in general.

The girlfriend thing is GTA 4 was poor as well, games like Mass Effect had already done relationships much better.

woggleman

Truth is, most people want RPG elements in open world games and a sense of exploration, both of which GTA 4 scaled down considerably from SA.

Also, after having 3 cities, Mt Chilliad, countryside and jets in SA going back to the most unappealing city in the USA was gonna be a problem....but obviously GTA 4 was still better than most games in general.

The girlfriend thing is GTA 4 was poor as well, games like Mass Effect had already done relationships much better.

How is NYC the most unappealing city in the USA? Tons of people move there from all over the world and even more tourists go there every day.

MaddFool

IV was the best GTA ever made i love that game especially the story. i got hella hooked onto story and,even though it sounds kinda childish,i felt what Niko felt like in the cutscene from Three Leaf Clover when punkass Gerry told Niko if he f*cked with his family he would f*ck with Niko's and just from Niko's expression i could tell he felt mad and sad.Sad cus he knew that Roman wasnt a fighter and it probably killed Niko to think what would happen to Rom and mad cus if he did anything to Gerry he would get more problems.Niko also had cojones cus he stared Gerry down too in that same cutscene so i respect him & i know he's just a fictional character but the story was so great it felt real.IV was one of the greatest gaming experiences for me.

DeafMetal

I love the game but I know it's not perfect and I can see where people have their gripes. The chunk of the complaints are with the fact that Rockstar actually removed elements from its previous game this time around to focus on "immersion" and a little bit more "grittiness" and "realism." I put those in quotes because they didn't work for a lot of people. Red Dead Redemption completely stomps it in every shared mechanic, imo.

It's not really an opinion. It's a fact. All the mechanics in RDR are better although they should be. It's a newer game.

I guess it's not the most popular opinion, but I still like GTA IV more. I don't know, but post 9/11 NYC seen through the eyes of an immigrant is more interesting to me than the old west.

Don't get me wrong. It's a visually stunning piece of art, but I find GTA IV far more engrossing even if its core mechanics aren't as sharp. I also prefer the side missions too. RDR always felt underdone for some reason in that regard.

IV is pretty amazing alright but I preferred SA. Even now. I do respect guys like miamivicecity holding the torch for IV. It just lacked the progression a lot of us thought IV would take after San Andreas.

There was an expectation... I know Rockstar doesn't follow formulas or patterns but the common thing GTA's did was add features, expand the map with each iteration. EG: We went from one city to three.

Naturally, a lot of people expected something bigger, something with more variety (in all respects - map, missions, features, colour)

It's not saying IV wasn't amazing and set a bar really high. However those things that wore off in 5 years like graphics and to a small extent, physics were expected to be an improvement on the III era games. It was next-gen after all.

One thing that annoys me is the slanderous attitude that some people have for preferring San Andreas. They reduce us to little ignorant fools like only silly stuff like rubber dildos when they know that's patently not true. I enjoyed the freedom in SA. The seemingly endless missions and side missions and collectibles with rewards. The better economy, the retro music. Flying during sunrise listening to David Bowie or simple being bored of one city and have two completely distinct other cities to go to.

IV is pretty amazing alright but I preferred SA. Even now. I do respect guys like miamivicecity holding the torch for IV. It just lacked the progression a lot of us thought IV would take after San Andreas.

There was an expectation... I know Rockstar doesn't follow formulas or patterns but the common thing GTA's did was add features, expand the map with each iteration. EG: We went from one city to three.

Naturally, a lot of people expected something bigger, something with more variety (in all respects - map, missions, features, colour)

It's not saying IV wasn't amazing and set a bar really high. However those things that wore off in 5 years like graphics and to a small extent, physics were expected to be an improvement on the III era games. It was next-gen after all.

One thing that annoys me is the slanderous attitude that some people have for preferring San Andreas. They reduce us to little ignorant fools like only silly stuff like rubber dildos when they know that's patently not true. I enjoyed the freedom in SA. The seemingly endless missions and side missions and collectibles with rewards. The better economy, the retro music. Flying during sunrise listening to David Bowie or simple being bored of one city and have two completely distinct other cities to go to.

IV has built the foundations for V.

IV divided fans (but remember we all love GTA)

V will re-unite the fans.

I feel the same way aswell TPFS in regards to GTA IV side. I've seen quite alot of slanderous bashing towards GTA IV fans reducing us to "graphics whores" and it has annoyed me since it was released.

It doesn't seem quite as bad now, but it was in 2008. However I can't say I'm sweet and innocent. I'm sure if you dug through some of my older posts there have been times where I've lost it lol. I try to be more open and listen to both sides instead of disregarding the other.

Guys like you are fine because it's not your intention to drag people down who prefer GTA IV as their favourite GTA. I suppose sometimes it's a bit like brothers fighting. Despite all the arguing we're still family.

Xcommunicated

Truth is, most people want RPG elements in open world games and a sense of exploration, both of which GTA 4 scaled down considerably from SA.

Yep, this is easily my biggest gripe with IV. Such a waste of a beautifully detailed city when there is no good reason to explore it. Finding and killing 200 pigeons for the sake of 2.5% game completion and nothing else is totally unrewarding and unsatisfying gameplay. The random encounters were a good idea, but they were hardly enough to justify stripping so many other things away.

IV will always be a mixed bag for me. The only thing I liked about it on my first play through was exploring the map along with the driving/damage physics. Having played through it again last year, it grew on me some, but any of the five GTAs from the 3D era will always beat it hands down in my book.

Druffmaul

There's a lot of hate for it everywhere, across the entire GTA fan base. I myself didn't care much for it the first time I played it, I hated Niko, I hated Roman, I hated all their friends, I hated the driving, I hated the shooting, I hated the social network... but about a year later I decided to replay it and I guess something clicked. I adapted to the superior driving controls and physics, I learned how to master the shooting, the characters all grew on me... I did a complete turn around. After a couple more play thrus it was was favorite GTA. It was one of those things that needed time to be appreciated, to grow on me. It's by far the best GTA in terms of turning you loose in a virtual world. When I look back on the 2008 me who hated it, I think he's a jackass. I honestly feel sorry for people who hate GTA IV. It's their loss.

was GTA IV your first GTA game, or were you full of GTA SA and just had different expectations for IV at first?

seems like most here who hate IV were VC and SA veterans and experienced the loss of abilities, content, etc. that they liked and loved in those earlier games but which were not present in IV.

GTA 3 was my first. My issues with IV were mostly down to the feel of the controls. Especially driving, I remember the first time I played through IV, I would always think "I wonder if it's even possible to get from point A to point B without crashing at least once?" I just needed a lot of time to adapt.

SA is actually my least favorite. Not only did I not mind that IV went back to the more focused approach of 3 and VC, that was one of the things I liked about it. Personally I thought most of the sandbox and "mission variety" in SA was a bunch of useless cruft. Wow, look at all those hideous clothes and haircuts I would never ever want to put on my character! Wow, a mission where you dance! Wow, a mission where you make your car dance! Wow, another endless drive through a wasteland! Weeeeeee!" Seriously, I think SA fanboys must have brain tumors.

waikzguy8998

I don't think it's so much that people "hated" GTA IV, just that it either didn't live up to expectations and or the overall feeling of the game was a tad more depressing than SA or VC

Take for instance the map size alone. Even though it was the breakthrough GTA for next gen consoles at the time, it lacked a lot in terms of size and space. After 4 years of development fans still looked at it and could safely say "it's not only smaller than GTA SA but there's less enterable buildings, less vehicles, less weapons, and next to no variety"

Basically we wer tremendously spoiled with GTA SA in terms of it's immense size, number of buildings to enter, number of weapons, variations on landscapes, having a country side, having small towns, and overall having a much more bright and fun atmosphere, something that IV could never live up to even though that was not the goal of IV

NYC PATROL

Because of that people had high expectations for IV. I loved GTA IV but i'll admit I was disappointed by the lack of things to do after the story.And i'll also add some people didn't like the mission structure. Go here. Kill him.etc. I didn't mind it too too much...

ImbetterThanYou

Actually, GTA IV is generally loved, it's a small community that hates the game, they just preach and complain about how much of a let down and how bad they thought it was that it, as opposed to the fans of GTA IV, there are a lot of GTA IV fans that are just casual fans and don't go on and on about how great it was, almost all the people who hate GTA IV though, complain about it constantly and it just seems like there is more of them then there really is.

You must be one of those people that talk sh*t without facts i dislike you pricks immensely, you can clearly see that IV even on this forum full of hardcore GTA fans was a boring piece of sh*t they stepped so far backwards even GTA I is ahead, practically everyone(real life people in the outside world) i know that played IV said the same thing its a grey bring piece of sh*t, people bought it on past experience and name only i personally thought it was gonna blow my favorite GTA SA out of the water because it was coming out 4 years after on a next-gen machine, but no it was just a glorified darts and bowling simulator, its a shame because they wasted the most iconic American city on a Serbian bum, a reluctant biker, and a gay guys bodyguard, such a sad shame.

Druffmaul

Actually, GTA IV is generally loved, it's a small community that hates the game, they just preach and complain about how much of a let down and how bad they thought it was that it, as opposed to the fans of GTA IV, there are a lot of GTA IV fans that are just casual fans and don't go on and on about how great it was, almost all the people who hate GTA IV though, complain about it constantly and it just seems like there is more of them then there really is.

You must be one of those people that talk sh*t without facts i dislike you pricks immensely, you can clearly see that IV even on this forum full of hardcore GTA fans was a boring piece of sh*t they stepped so far backwards even GTA I is ahead, practically everyone(real life people in the outside world) i know that played IV said the same thing its a grey bring piece of sh*t, people bought it on past experience and name only i personally thought it was gonna blow my favorite GTA SA out of the water because it was coming out 4 years after on a next-gen machine, but no it was just a glorified darts and bowling simulator, its a shame because they wasted the most iconic American city on a Serbian bum, a reluctant biker, and a gay guys bodyguard, such a sad shame.

Actually, GTA IV is generally loved, it's a small community that hates the game, they just preach and complain about how much of a let down and how bad they thought it was that it, as opposed to the fans of GTA IV, there are a lot of GTA IV fans that are just casual fans and don't go on and on about how great it was, almost all the people who hate GTA IV though, complain about it constantly and it just seems like there is more of them then there really is.

You must be one of those people that talk sh*t without facts i dislike you pricks immensely, you can clearly see that IV even on this forum full of hardcore GTA fans was a boring piece of sh*t they stepped so far backwards even GTA I is ahead, practically everyone(real life people in the outside world) i know that played IV said the same thing its a grey bring piece of sh*t, people bought it on past experience and name only i personally thought it was gonna blow my favorite GTA SA out of the water because it was coming out 4 years after on a next-gen machine, but no it was just a glorified darts and bowling simulator, its a shame because they wasted the most iconic American city on a Serbian bum, a reluctant biker, and a gay guys bodyguard, such a sad shame.

From one prick to another...

Don't talk about yourself like that Paddy, why don't you f*ck off down to the pub get plastered and go for a swim with Paddy and Paddy maybe Paddy will want to come as well so don't leave him out, ohh and don't forget about Paddy you gypsy c*nt.

AUsername

Objectively speaking, i think it's a good game. Personally, I don't like the whole 'concrete jungle'/city settings,but I still managed to enjoy the game to some extent so that really says something. But what really makes me bored of this game other than that is the ridiculously slow/sluggish movements and aiming especially when playing w/o auto-aim, the bad gun fights and weapons,the lack of places to speed through for more than a couple of seconds and have fun w/o bumping into something and many other stuff. On a side note, I recently played Vice City which I played as a kid but literally forgot everything about it except maybe the final mission and the rc mission, so I was basically playing it for the first time,and even though this outdated game was also entirely set in an even smaller city,I still managed to enjoy it 10x better than IV for some reason and I'm sure it wasn't nostalgia.I don't know,I guess the III era has some kind of charm which this era lost.

There's a lot of hate for it everywhere, across the entire GTA fan base. I myself didn't care much for it the first time I played it, I hated Niko, I hated Roman, I hated all their friends, I hated the driving, I hated the shooting, I hated the social network... but about a year later I decided to replay it and I guess something clicked. I adapted to the superior driving controls and physics, I learned how to master the shooting, the characters all grew on me... I did a complete turn around. After a couple more play thrus it was was favorite GTA. It was one of those things that needed time to be appreciated, to grow on me. It's by far the best GTA in terms of turning you loose in a virtual world. When I look back on the 2008 me who hated it, I think he's a jackass. I honestly feel sorry for people who hate GTA IV. It's their loss.

was GTA IV your first GTA game, or were you full of GTA SA and just had different expectations for IV at first?

seems like most here who hate IV were VC and SA veterans and experienced the loss of abilities, content, etc. that they liked and loved in those earlier games but which were not present in IV.

GTA 3 was my first. My issues with IV were mostly down to the feel of the controls. Especially driving, I remember the first time I played through IV, I would always think "I wonder if it's even possible to get from point A to point B without crashing at least once?" I just needed a lot of time to adapt.

SA is actually my least favorite. Not only did I not mind that IV went back to the more focused approach of 3 and VC, that was one of the things I liked about it. Personally I thought most of the sandbox and "mission variety" in SA was a bunch of useless cruft. Wow, look at all those hideous clothes and haircuts I would never ever want to put on my character! Wow, a mission where you dance! Wow, a mission where you make your car dance! Wow, another endless drive through a wasteland! Weeeeeee!" Seriously, I think SA fanboys must have brain tumors.

+1.

I liked that it went back to a much tighter focus aswell. SA has always been a bit hit and miss to me.

I mean I love the game, but even when it was new it didn't feel very "GTA" IMO with how it seemed to shoe horn bits and pieces into itself.

Spuds725

Characters were stock and boring-- and Roman was just plain irritating (he is worse then Lance Vance)-- The story just didn't do it for me (even playing through 3 times -- a long story as to the reason why, but in a nut shell, I wanted the platinum trophy).

City was fine-- I enjoyed TLOD and TBOGT much more then Niko's story....

If it were not for GTA IV Multiplayer (which could have been much improved)-- the game IMO would have been a flop IMO-- I absolutely loved IV's Multiplayer aspect-- ... and NO I'm not comparing it to SA-- I enjoyed III and VC's stories much more then SA and IV's

Aragrox

I hate it because they try to make it realistic and its no where near. Car sounds, acceleration, top speed, guns sounds, gun damage, traffic AI, police AI, weather AI, and the list go on. Make the fun things realistic, and make the things that make a game, a game.

TrevorSpeed914

I would say because the open world aspect was lacking; I felt limited in what I could do in comparison to San Andreas. Gay Tony kinda cleared this up a little.

Ultimately, GTA 4 is probably the best out of any of the games in terms of the missions and storyline. I beat the game in four days, playing constantly, and felt more immersed than in the other games. I didn't feel as compelled to take breaks between missions, and all of the realism worked well within them. In the open world, free-style play, not so much.

I would say because the open world aspect was lacking; I felt limited in what I could do in comparison to San Andreas. Gay Tony kinda cleared this up a little.

Ultimately, GTA 4 is probably the best out of any of the games in terms of the missions and storyline. I beat the game in four days, playing constantly, and felt more immersed than in the other games. I didn't feel as compelled to take breaks between missions, and all of the realism worked well within them. In the open world, free-style play, not so much.

I can't say I agree with that. I like doing missions and love the story in GTA IV, but I enjoy exploring the city much more than the GTA III era.

To me it has a lot more character and depth. Peds don't feel like mindless zombies and I just love the architecture. For someone like me it's the closest I have to visiting NYC.

It blends everything together so well. I really don't like using the word "realistic" because I wouldn't say GTA IV is that realistic anyway. It's however the most believable GTA to date.

DarrinPA

It blends everything together so well. I really don't like using the word "realistic" because I wouldn't say GTA IV is that realistic anyway. It's however the most believable GTA to date.

If we're only speaking of missions - GTA San Andreas actually has the most missions based on real life happenings.

The lack of things to do in GTA IV is what made me get bored with the game so quickly. I understand that it was a new engine and everything so I can forgive them for that, but not forget it, as everytime I go back to play IV it ends pretty quickly.

AuSsIeThUnDeR36

Dat blurry draw distance. I can only play for like an hr at a time then I have to get out the eye drops. The draw distance sucks in IV and SA it's all ok I don't need eye drops.I think the other thing for me is the way SA flows from mission to mission. You don't seem to have to travel far to get to the next mission. In IV I felt like I was driving for ages and ages. It gets tiresome. Once I actually fell asleep and I woke up about ten minutes later, Niko had stopped in the middle of the street with traffic banked up around him.

It blends everything together so well. I really don't like using the word "realistic" because I wouldn't say GTA IV is that realistic anyway. It's however the most believable GTA to date.

If we're only speaking of missions - GTA San Andreas actually has the most missions based on real life happenings.

The lack of things to do in GTA IV is what made me get bored with the game so quickly. I understand that it was a new engine and everything so I can forgive them for that, but not forget it, as everytime I go back to play IV it ends pretty quickly.

It's mainly the context I'm talking about. GTA IV doesn't have the same level of tv/movie influence that the GTA III era does, It really does feel like the underbelly of NYC seen from the eyes of an immigrant.

SA's story/missions will always have the stigma of being ridiculous (good or bad however you want to take it).

AuSsIeThUnDeR36: I really don't see how that's a problem when you can catch taxis everywhere. What's wrong with getting from mission to mission in GTA IV? They're no more or less spread out on the map than other GTAs and the ability to hail taxis and skip pretty much renders any sort of excuse.

Fair enough if you were talking about friends being on the opposite side of the map, but getting from mission to mission isn't hardly as bad or tedious as you seem to imply.